National Hardwood Lumber Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
361523350
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Memphis, TN, USA
Phone
9013771818
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,690,902
Expenses
$4,889,499
Assets
$3,284,067
Liabilities
$928,667

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

38 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BUCKY PESCAGLIA (PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHANIE VANDYSTADT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JON SYRE (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DALLIN BROOKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DALLIN BROOKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $310,811 total reported compensation
  • DANA P SPESSERT (CHIEF INSPECTOR): $157,814 total reported compensation
  • DESIREE C FREEMAN (CONTROLLER): $137,369 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Member services are provided throughout the year and include advocacy, networking and marketing opportunities, promotion of member businesses, continuing education programs, and access to expert advice and training. In addition, the association provides inspection services in order to ensure there is a uniform method of inspection and grading of hardwoods and settles disputes in the grading system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 33 of 33 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $311K · 38 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $241K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.